On May 3, 2016, the Ohio Supreme Court issued a 5-2 decision in White v. King. The Court held that a prearranged discussion of the public business of a public body by a majority of its members through a series of private e-mail communications is subject to Ohio’s Open Meetings Act, O.R.C. § 121.22.
The Open Meetings Act requires all meetings of any public body to be public meetings open to the public at all times, with certain requirements. Under the Act, a meeting is defined as any prearranged discussion of the public business of the public body by a majority of its members.
Petitioner Adam White, a member of the Board of Education for the Olentangy Local School District, filed a lawsuit against his fellow Board members and the Board itself, alleging the Board violated the Open Meetings Act. White investigated improper expenditures by two of the District’s athletic directors, and following the investigation, over White’s objections, the Board members passed a policy requiring all communications between board members and staff to first pass through the District’s superintendent or the District’s Treasurer. The Columbus Dispatch published an editorial praising White’s objection to the policy and criticizing the other Board members. The other Board members, the Superintendent and district staff members discussed how to respond to the negative editorial via email, and agreed upon a response via email. The response was ultimately published in the Dispatch and ratified by all of the Board except White. White believed the e-mail conversations violated the Open Meetings Act and filed suit.
The trial court granted judgment in favor of the other four Board members, finding the individual members were immune from suit, and granted judgment in favor of the Board itself, ruling the correspondence did not violate the Open Meetings Act. The trial court held that no prearranged discussion of public business occurred because the communications among the Board members originated with an unsolicited e-mail from the board president, that O.R.C. § 121.22 does not apply to e-mails, and that at the time of the correspondence, there was no pending rule or resolution before the Board.
White only appealed the trial court’s decision with regard to the Board as a whole. The appellate court affirmed the decision, holding that just because the board later ratified the response to the editorial didn’t retroactively create a prearranged discussion of public business.
However, the Ohio Supreme Court disagreed and reversed the lower court’s decision, finding the e-mail communications were subject to the Open Meetings Act, O.R.C. § 121.22. The Court held that nothing in the statute states a meeting has to occur face to face, therefore it covers email communications as well, and that when a board of education formally votes to ratify a prior action, that ratified action constitutes public business.